Paid Sick Leave, More Overtime Proposed For Mpls. Workers
The proposal would allow workers to know their schedules ahead of time and earn overtime if they work more than eight ...
The proposal would allow workers to know their schedules ahead of time and earn overtime if they work more than eight hours a day. It would affect all Minneapolis businesses with more than one employee.
The Minneapolis restaurant scene is one of flavor, variety and growth. It’s just a slice of the local business scene but one councilmember said that scenery needs some change.
“We’re hearing about gaps in the workplace that are disproportionately affecting low-wage workers, women and people of color,” councilmember Elizabeth Gladden said.
So she and a list of other city workers have drafted a plan. It would mean workers get their schedule a month out, they get paid sick leave and any shift over eight hours would mean overtime.
Christina Cortez has worked at McDonald’s for nine years. She said knowing her schedule 28 days out would be huge.
“Then I wouldn’t have to worry, Am I going to schedule my appointment or my baby’s appointment on the day I’m actually supposed to be at work?” she said.
A partner at Hell’s Kitchen said his employees don’t seem to need a month’s notice.
“[We’ve talked] to our servers about, What do you want?” Pat Forciea said. “Everybody kind of agreed on two weeks.”
Joe Elliot, father to 4-year-old Jamir said the sick leave is what excites him. He said he didn’t get any when he broke his hand,
“I had to debate [whether] to stay home and relax, like the doctor said, or lose my job,” Elliot said.
But change comes at a cost.
“Maybe businesses feel it’s just too expensive to do business in Minneapolis, so I’m instead going to open up my restaurant in Edina or I’m going to open it up in Bloomington,” he said.
But he said if it all passes, he’ll see it through.
“We want to do what’s right for the people who work here and their families,” he said.
A March report from the Department of Health found that the lack of paid sick leave in Minnesota workplaces has contributed to contagious disease outbreaks and actually added to employers’ health care expenses.
WCCO also spoke with a labor attorney. He said the paid sick leave and overtime seem like reasonable changes, but scheduling 28 days out is a bit extreme. He said 14 days out would be more practical.
The council hopes to vote on an ordinance by the end of the year.
Source: CBS Minnesota
Yellen nudges up traders' view on year-end United States rate hike
Yellen nudges up traders' view on year-end United States rate hike
Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen said Friday that the case for raising interest rates has strengthened in light of a...
Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen said Friday that the case for raising interest rates has strengthened in light of a solid job market and an improved outlook for the US economy and inflation.
At a gathering of central bankers from round the world in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, Yellen said improvements in the USA labor market and expectations for moderate economic growth have boosted the case for a rate rise, supporting what the rate futures market has been pricing in for some time. The gains were all but erased after Fed Vice Chairman Stanley Fischer said her remarks leave open the possibility of boosting rates in September.
The economy is "nearing" the Fed's goals of full employment and stable prices, share said.
With an interest rate hike unlikely in the immediate future, the dollar is struggling to gain traction.
Still Yellen declined to hint at whether the Fed might raise rates at its next policy meeting, September 20-21, or at its subsequent meetings in early November and mid-December.
The head of America's central bank said the case for an interest rate hike had strengthened but stopped short of indicating any timetable for a move.
"Yellen's speech at Jackson Hole today didn't necessarily offer much in the way of surprises", said OANDA senior market analyst Craig Erlam.
"New policy tools, which helped the Federal Reserve respond to the financial crisis and Great Recession, are likely to remain useful in dealing with future downturns", Yellen said. Although setting a hawkish tone and perhaps trying to sound balanced, Yellen did issue a few cautionary words, but for the most part, she indicated that more rate hikes were on the horizon.
Although US government data earlier on Friday showed the economy growing only sluggishly in the second quarter, Yellen said a lot of new jobs were being created and economic growth would likely continue at a moderate pace.
Yellen's words returned a measure of clarity on the intentions of U.S. monetary policymakers, who have been publicly at odds in recent months over the need to raise rates in the near-term. "On balance, it strengthened the case for a December move", said Bill Northey, chief investment officer for the private client group at U.S. Bank in Helena, Montana.
Prices for fed funds futures implied investors saw about even odds that the Fed will raise rates in December, largely unchanged from before Yellen's remarks.
The dollar eased to 100.47 yen from 100.55 yen Thursday in NY, while the euro nudged up to US$1.1291 from US$1.1281.
In a meeting, members of the groups Fed Up and the Center for Popular Democracy told Fed policymakers that the assessment that the USA was approaching full employment did not reflect life for many blacks and Latinos looking for work. The dollar's 5 percent loss this year reflects a dimming outlook for the US central bank to reduce stimulus and diverge from unprecedented easing in Europe and Asia.
In afternoon trading, the dollar index, which measures the greenback versus six major currencies, rose 0.8 percent at 95.563.
By Adam Cater
Source
Juez Federal Suspende la Acción Ejecutiva un Día Antes de Entrar en Vigor
Univision - February 16, 2015 - Un juez federal de Texas suspendió temporalmente el lunes la entrada en vigor de la...
Univision - February 16, 2015 - Un juez federal de Texas suspendió temporalmente el lunes la entrada en vigor de la acción ejecutiva del presidente Barack Obama, un día antes de que comenzara la inscripción a la primera parte que frena la deportación de unos 2.4 millones de dreamers.
“No está permitido hacer nada para implementar ninguno de los nuevos programas que Obama anunció.” El beneficio migratorio, anunciado el 20 de noviembre del año pasado por Barack Obama, en total, protege de la deportación a entre 4.5 y 5 millones de indocumentados, entre ellos, padres de ciudadanos y residentes legales permanentes (DAPA, por sus siglas en inglés) que están en el país desde antes del 1 de enero de 2010 y carecen de antecedentes criminales. También amplía la cobertura de la Acción Diferida (DACA, por sus siglas en inglés) del 15 de junio de 2007 al 1 de enero de 2010, cuya entrada en vigor estaba prevista para este 18 de febrero. El juez Andrew S. Hanen dio la orden de frenar la medida y dictó que el gobierno federal no tiene permitido hacer nada para implementar ninguno de los nuevos programas que Obama anunció en noviembre. Minutos después de haberse emitido la medida cautelar, el gobernador de Texas, Greg Abbott, quien lidera la demanda, anunció el fallo provisional a través de su cuenta en Twitter. Juez federal acepto su pedido para detener la orden ejecutiva para indocumentados bajo el programa de DAPA. El fallo provisional de Hanen es en respuesta a una demanda presentada en diciembre por 26 estados, liderados por Texas, contra la acción ejecutiva. Veinticuatro de ellos, gobernados por republicanos, argumentan que Obama se extralimitó en sus funciones y que la medida viola la Constitución. La decisión de Hanen significa que aquellos dreamers (soñadores) que tenían pensado enviar sus solicitudes para evitar ser deportados a partir de este miércoles, no podrán hacerlo. El dictamen provisional ocurre mientras la Corte Federal para el Distrito Sur de Texas, que preside Hanen, sigue revisando la demanda. En su fallo, el juez asegura que "al haber hallado que al menos un demandante satisface todos los elementos necesarios para mantener la demanda", concede "un mandato judicial temporal" para suspender la aplicación de las medidas hasta que haya "una resolución final de los méritos de esta causa o una orden ulterior de este tribunal". La acción ejecutiva frena temporalmente por tres años las deportaciones y concede un permiso de trabajo por el mismo periodo de tiempo. Al tercer año se esperaba que pudieran renovarse ambos beneficios. Los demandantes habían pedido a Hanen que emita una "orden judicial preliminar" que bloqueara temporalmente tanto DACA como DAPA en tanto la querella sigue su curso. El Servicio de Inmigración comenzará a recibir solicitudes de quienes califiquen para Acción Ejecutiva Extendida. Wendy Feliz, representante del American Immigration Council, había advertido en la víspera que Hanen no estaba obligado a tomar una decisión antes de este miércoles, “pero se esperaba que lo hiciera”, reportó la agencia mexicana Notimex. Otra de las opciones que tenía el juez, además de suspender temporalmente la acción ejecutiva, era no tomar acción alguna y también rechazar el otorgamiento de la suspensión pedida por los demandantes. También Hanen pudo haber emitido una orden de suspensión parcial contra algunos de los beneficios contenidos en la acción ejecutiva. La decisión de Hanen ocurre en momentos que el Congreso, controlado por los republicanos, debate si aprueba el presupuesto del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional (DHS, por sus siglas en inglés) para lo que resta del año fiscal 2015. A finales de enero la Cámara de Representantes aprobó incluir dos enmiendas al proyecto, una que anula la acción ejecutiva y otra que prohíbe al DHS utilizar dineros del presupuesto en la ejecución de la medida. El Presidente Barack Obama había advertido que vetará cualquier iniciativa de ley que frene la acción ejecutiva. Pero no puede vetar la medida de Hanen. Solo apelarla. De no aprobarse el presupuesto antes del 27 de febrero, el DHS se quedará sin fondos para seguir operando, excepto áreas de emergencia de seguridad nacional. Los republicanos, sin embargo, han dicho que seguirán desafiando la medida ya sea en el Congreso o en las cortes, y exigen al gobierno que escuche la voz del pueblo expresada en las urnas el martes 4 de noviembre del año pasado cuando concedió a los republicanos la mayoría en ambas cámaras del legislativo. La demanda del 3 de diciembre fue entablada por el entonces gobernador electo de Texas, el republicano Greg Abbott, y luego secundada por otros 25 estados, 24 de ellos gobernados por republicanos. West Virginia y Montana están gobernados por demócratas, pero sus fiscales son republicanos. Nevada, un estado gobernado por el hispano Brian Sandoval, es otra de las sorpresas de esta demanda. Los demandantes argumentaron en ella que Obama no siguió la Ley de Procedimiento Administrativo en la emisión de su directiva migratoria. Y sostienen que la acción ejecutiva de Obama, en la propia admisión del presidente, "cambia la ley y establece una nueva política, excede su autoridad constitucional y perturba el delicado equilibrio de poderes". “La extralimitación constitucional por el presidente Obama es clara y muy preocupante”, señala el recurso. El Center for Popular Democracy comentó que el fallo del juez Hanen es una medida cautelar temporal y que “no cambia el hecho de que la orden ejecutiva del presidente Obama sea una victoria para las familias inmigrantes. “Hacemos un llamado al Departamento de Justicia para que presente inmediatamente una instancia ante el Quinto Tribunal de Apelaciones de Circuito para que sea desechada esta demanda sin mérito que se traduce en un ataque a las familias inmigrantes y una pérdida de dinero de los contribuyentes, dijo Joaquín Guerra, del Proyecto Organización de Texas (Texas Organizing Project) en un comunicado poco después de conocerse el dictamen de Hanen. A mediados de enero, luego de una audiencia en la que ambas partes presentaron y defendieron sus argumentos, Hanen dijo que no emitiría un fallo sobre la solicitud de interdicto sino hasta antes del 30 de enero. Señaló que el caso era "un área de debate legítimo" y que "no hay tipos malos en esto". Dijo que Brownsville y el sur de Texas han visto tanto los beneficios como los inconvenientes de la aplicación estricta de las leyes de inmigración y de lo que "algunas personas llaman una política laxa de aplicación". Durante la audiencia Hanen admitió que había criticado la política de inmigración de Estados Unidos en dos fallos previos, pero también señaló que en ambos casos su determinación fue a favor del gobierno federal. Además de Texas, los estados demandantes son Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Carolina Norte, Carolina del Sur, Dakota del Norte, Dakota del Sur, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia del Oeste y Wisconsin. Los estados que se oponen a la acción ejecutiva no solicitan una indemnización, sino que quieren que los tribunales bloqueen la acción ejecutiva y señalan que el mandatario se extralimitó en sus poderes. Esta no es la primera vez que Hanen se pronuncia en contra de los inmigrantes. Hanen, el año pasado, acusó al gobierno de participar en conspiraciones criminales para llevar al país niños de contrabando al reunirlos con los padres que vivían en el país de manera ilegal. Source
New Report: Big Banks Require Tellers to Use Predatory Practices
Bill Moyers & Company - April 9, 2015, by Katie Rose Quandt - Front-line workers at our nation’s big banks —...
Bill Moyers & Company - April 9, 2015, by Katie Rose Quandt - Front-line workers at our nation’s big banks — tellers, loan interviewers and customer service representatives — are required by their employers to exploit customers, according to a revealing report out today from the Center for Popular Democracy (CPD). Big banks have internal systems of penalties and rewards that entice employees to push subprime loans and credit cards on customers who would be better off without them.
CPD’s report outlines several illegal predatory practices big banks have been caught employing, usually via their front-line workers:
Blatantly discriminatory lending: In 2011 and 2012, Bank of America and Wells Fargo paid out settlements for charging higher rates and fees to tens of thousands of African American and Hispanic borrowers than to similarly qualified white customers. Minority customers were also more likely to be steered into (more expensive, riskier) subprime mortgages.
Manipulating payment processing to maximize overdraft charges: When a savings account balance drops too low, the bank charges a hefty overdraft fee on each subsequent purchase. Both Bank of America and US Bank paid settlements for intentionally processing customers’ largest debit card payments first, regardless of chronological order, in order to hit $0 faster and maximize overdraft fees. US Bank was also accused of allowing debit card purchases on zero-balance accounts to go through (and incur overdraft fees), instead of denying the charges upfront.
Forcing sale of unneeded products: Wells Fargo, JP Morgan Chase and Citigroup were accused of forcing customers to purchase overpriced property insurance.
Manipulative sales quotas: Lawsuits show Wells Fargo and Bank of America created incentive programs for employees with the interests of the company — not the customer — in mind. Wells Fargo’s sales quotas encouraged bank workers to steer prime-eligible customers to subprime loans, while falsifying other clients’ income information without their knowledge. Bank of America’s “Hustle” program rewarded quantity over quality, encouraging workers to skip processes and checks intended to protect the borrower.
Instead of cutting back on the risky, unethical practices that led to the Great Recession, the CPD report asserts that big banks have not learned from their mistakes. Bank workers report higher levels of sales pressure in 2013 than in 2008, and most do not have the job security or seniority to simply refuse to hawk credit cards or steer customers into risky financial situations. While the financial sector is turning near-record profits, the average bank teller made just $12.25 an hour in 2013 (a real-dollar decrease from 2007), causing 31 percent of tellers’ families to rely on public assistance. What’s more, 85 percent of these underpaid front-line bank employees are women, and one-third are people of color. Most are in no position to risk losing their job or having their pay docked for stepping out of line.
Several anonymous big bank employees went into detail about how their employers incentivize sales:
An HSBC employee reported that when workers fell short of sales goals, the difference was taken out of their paychecks.
A teller at a major bank said she is expected to sell three new checking, savings, or debit card accounts every day. If she falls short, she gets written up.
Customer service representatives at one major bank’s call-center said everyone is expected to make at least 40 percent of the sales of the top seller. Credit card sales count for extra, encouraging callers to push credit cards on customers who would be better served with checking or savings accounts.
A call-center worker said she offers a credit card to every customer, regardless of whether it would be beneficial. She explained: “If you aren’t offering, you can get marked down — the managers and Quality Analysts listen to your call, and can tell if you aren’t offering.”
“We’re not servicing their needs,” said one front-line worker. “What they want, what they need, isn’t important to us. Selling them a product is … Some of our customers just have their savings, many are just retirees.”
As the report concludes, “Our nation’s big banks are committed to a model that jeopardizes our communities and prevents bank employees from having a voice in their workplace.”
Source
Woman Who Confronted Jeff Flake in the Elevator: 'I Wanted Him to Feel My Rage'
Woman Who Confronted Jeff Flake in the Elevator: 'I Wanted Him to Feel My Rage'
The protesters who cornered Flake just before he voted on Kavanaugh's confirmation spoke out about why they did it....
The protesters who cornered Flake just before he voted on Kavanaugh's confirmation spoke out about why they did it.
Read the full article here.
How a Grassroots Coalition Got the Elitist Federal Reserve to Sit up and Listen on Race
How a Grassroots Coalition Got the Elitist Federal Reserve to Sit up and Listen on Race
A year ago, the Federal Reserve, our nation’s most powerful economic policy maker, said that there was nothing it could...
A year ago, the Federal Reserve, our nation’s most powerful economic policy maker, said that there was nothing it could do about racial disparities. Now, according to the Wall Street Journal, there is "a rising recognition within the Fed that the racial gaps in the economy are becoming more pronounced and that there is a role for monetary policy to play in shrinking those gaps."
That's a major shift in how monetary policy gets made. How did it happen? A grassroots uprising from low-income people of color, the unemployed, and the underemployed pushed issues of racial justice front and center into debates about monetary policy – and they succeeded in changing the conversation at the Federal Reserve.
The Fed Up campaign is a coalition of community-based organizations from across the country, labor unions, policy think tanks, and expert economists who decided to take on the Federal Reserve, long considered immune to outside criticism.
The Great Recession of 2008 brought things to a head. With Congress failing to pass an adequate stimulus in the wake of the crash and authorizing almost nothing since, it’s become clear that the Federal Reserve is the country’s only institution acting to stimulate the economy.
Progressives are concerned about raising wages, getting good jobs for more people, and building the bargaining power of workers to win victories like paid sick days and fair scheduling.
But they didn’t think to target the Federal Reserve, an institution designed to remain as insulated from the public as possible. The Fed system comprises a Board of Governors, whose members are appointed to 14-year terms by the President and approved by the Senate, as well as boards of directors for each of the 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks. These regional boards are overwhelming white and male and draw their membership largely from the corporate and financial sectors, which makes sense as two thirds of them are appointed by commercial banks.
Given the Federal Reserve’s opaque, insular structure designed to keep the influence of regular people at bay, it’s nothing short of remarkable that the Fed Up campaign has altered the conversation as much as it has in two short years.
Since its launch in the summer of 2014 the Fed Up Campaign has released reports on racial disparities in the economy andthe unrepresentative composition of the Fed, met with Fed Chair Janet Yellenface to face as well as 11 out of the 12 regional Bank presidents, conducted protests, and lobbied members of Congressto question Yellen on racial disparities during her semi-annual Humphrey Hawkins testimony before Congress.
Under questioning from Congress in February 2016, Janet Yellen insisted to Congress that she could not do anything about racial disparities. Yet, not even four months later, when Janet Yellen testified at the Humphrey Hawkins hearing in June, something was different.
Yellen began her testimonywith statistics on racial disparities in income and employment among Blacks and Latin@s. This is something the Fed has never done before. By including data on racial disparities, Yellen signaled that the status of communities of color is relevant to the Fed's decisions on the economy and she said that broad-based inclusion in the recovery is a priority..
Yellen made this historic move on racial justice because of the pressure the Fed Up coalition put both on the Fed and on Congress. In May, Fed Up worked with Congress members to send a letter to Yellen urging better public representation and diversity on the 12 regional Banks' boards of directors, which was ultimately signed by 127 senators and representatives.
Then Fed Up released aslate of candidatesfrom more diverse backgrounds who could be appointed to the leadership of the Federal Reserve Regional and a new reportabout potential conflicts of interest among current directors, which received coverage in the Wall Street Journal.
The advocacy with Congress worked. After meeting with Fed Up coalition member Common Good Ohio, Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) urged Yellen at her Congressional hearing to appoint people from more diverse backgrounds to the regional Banks. Sen. Robert Menendez(D-NJ) urged Yellen to improve on diversity, citing the fact that 83% of regional board directors are white – a figure from our February report.
And Sen.Elizabeth Warren(D-MA) echoed Fed Up's callfor reforming the process for selection regional Bank presidents, calling the process "broken" and saying, "I think Congress should take a hard look at reforming the regional Fed's selection process so that we can all benefit from a Fed leadership that reflects a broader array of both backgrounds and interests."
The next day Rep. Terri Sewell (D-AL) echoed Warren's call, asking Yellen whether she'd considered our recommendation to appoint three Class C directors at each regional Bank from backgrounds in academia, labor groups, and community-based organizations.
We still have a long way to go before one of the most powerful, secretive, least democratically accountable, and thoroughly corporate dominated institutions truly represents the public and serves all of the public -- including low-income people and communities of color.
But Janet Yellen’s most recent Humphrey Hawkins testimony does show that the Federal Reserve is not completely insulated from public opinion, and that regular people standing up and demanding to be heard can push even the Federal Reserve to listen.
By Shawn Sebastian
Source
This Is Exactly How HIV Activists Disrupted Congress to Save Health Care
This Is Exactly How HIV Activists Disrupted Congress to Save Health Care
Late last month, thousands of Americans with HIV/AIDS -- many of them among the millions of Americans who rely on...
Late last month, thousands of Americans with HIV/AIDS -- many of them among the millions of Americans who rely on Medicaid or Affordable Care Act (ACA) plans for their health coverage -- saw the news and breathed yet one more major sigh of relief: GOP Senate leader Mitch McConnell announced that, lacking the votes needed to win, the Senate would not go forward on its final effort this year to kill the ACA (aka Obamacare) and take a devastating bite out of Medicaid.
Read the full article here.
Critics Lining Up Against Charlotte’s Proposed City ID
Charlotte Observer - July 6, 2014, by Mark Price - The creation of an official Charlotte ID card is still only a...
Charlotte Observer - July 6, 2014, by Mark Price - The creation of an official Charlotte ID card is still only a proposal, but critics are already lining up, including a national political action group that claims the city’s plan will “aid and abet illegal immigrants.”
Two immigration reform groups – the national Americans for Legal Immigration PAC and NC Listen – say they will press North Carolina legislators to stop cities from creating IDs, which are of most benefit to people who don’t have Social Security numbers.
In Charlotte, that population is made up largely of immigrants of all nationalities who are not in the country legally. They can’t get a Social Security number or apply for a driver’s license, and they are subject to arrest and deportation.
About a half-dozen U.S. cities have already created municipal IDs, which experts see as a way of dealing locally with immigration issues that aren’t being solved on a national level.
Charlotte, like many of those other cities, has an immigrant population that is outpacing the growth rate of both whites and blacks, leading to entire neighborhoods and schools where foreign-born people are in the majority.
City leaders say that accepting them as residents is a practical matter. However, the ID proposal remains controversial and critics question whether it’s legal.
“It’s against federal law to aid and abet people in the country illegally and if this isn’t aiding and abetting, I don’t know what is,” said Ron Woodard of NC Listen.
William Gheen of Americans for Legal Immigration PAC is more blunt. “We will ask the General Assembly to stop any North Carolina city from helping illegal immigrants,” he said.
Charlotte Mayor Dan Clodfelter met with the city’s Immigrant Integration Task Force last month and asked the group to research a city ID program that can be used by all citizens to access community services.
The task force was created to craft policies that will make Charlotte more welcoming to immigrants of all nationalities, particularly those interested in starting businesses.
Recommendations – including whether to adopt a municipal ID program – are scheduled to be presented to the City Council in February.
Background checks at school
The idea of creating a city ID emerged in response to complaints from undocumented immigrant parents that they can’t interact with their own children in school classrooms.
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools requires a Social Security number so it can do criminal background checks daily on people who want to do volunteer work in schools. The district recently announced a team is exploring alternative forms of identification that can be used to perform those criminal background checks. It may complete its work later this year.
CMS is independent from city government and would not be required to accept a municipal ID.
Still, Clodfelter said he hoped the new ID might help undocumented parents gain greater access to schools.
“This is a question for the entire community,” Clodfelter said in a statement. “The city, county, school system, law enforcement, community based nonprofits and other agencies need to work together on a review of the options to explore what may be feasible at the local level.”
Hector Vaca of the immigrant advocacy group ActionNC says he has doubts a city ID could be easily used for criminal background checks. To do that, he says the city would have to share ID card specifics with state and federal law enforcement databases – and that’s not necessarily something undocumented immigrants want to see happen.
ActionNC supports municipal IDs, he said, but is waiting to see what Charlotte leaders propose.
“This is another way to identify people, which is something even the police have said would be a good thing,” Vaca said. “I think it’s contradictory when anti-immigrant groups say we need to better identify the people who are in this country, and yet when you give them another tool that helps identify people, those critics say they don’t want it.”
Uses for municipal IDs
The Immigrant Integration Task Force intends to study municipal IDs created by other cities, including a program adopted last month by New York City. That program, which goes into effect at the end of the year, allows any New Yorker, “regardless of immigration status,” to get a government-issued photo identification card from the city. The cards are predicted to cost about $10 per person.
Proponents of such programs say the IDs can accomplish a lot of good, including making communities safer.
A study by the Center for Popular Democracy notes that immigrants who don’t have IDs are often unable to open bank accounts, which makes them easy targets for thieves. Such immigrants are also reluctant to report crimes and/or to visit doctors for conditions that might pose a community health threat, the report says.
Charlotte police say the IDs could also be useful in identifying victims of crimes.
Emily Tucker of Center for Popular Democracy says criticism of ID programs is often based on a mistaken belief that it is all about helping undocumented immigrants. In New York, city leaders are negotiating with museums, sports venues, businesses and banks to have benefits associated with city ID cards.
“Undocumented people may have been the inspiration initially, but I think it undercuts that effectiveness of (winning support for) the card,” she said.
“In New York, we decided to market it to a cross section of New Yorkers, including the LGBT community, homeless advocates, and even the American Civil Liberties Union, which wanted a form of ID with privacy protections: Something people wouldn’t be afraid to apply for.”
Source
Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2014/07/06/5025949/critics-lining-up-ag...
Bill de Blasio: From Education to Poverty, Leadership by Example
Huffington Post - October 9, 2014, by Richard Eskow - Progressives who are elected to executive office have a unique...
Huffington Post - October 9, 2014, by Richard Eskow - Progressives who are elected to executive office have a unique opportunity to highlight neglected issues and stimulate much-needed debate, by taking actions which challenge the "conventional wisdom." They can change the political landscape by employing a principle that might be called "leadership by example."
The mayor of New York City is uniquely positioned to play this role, thanks to that city's prominence, and so far Bill de Blasio has done exceptionally well at it. Two of his actions -- on education and assistance to the poor -- deserve particular commendation, because they challenge the "bipartisan" consensus that has too often strangled open debate and left the public's interests unrepresented.
Action for the Impoverished
1. "Welfare Reform's" Record of Failure
"Centrist" Democrats like Bill Clinton, together with Republicans like Rudy Giuliani and Michael Bloomberg, have long sung the praises of "welfare reform" -- a set of policies that promised to turn welfare recipients into "productive citizens" through a combination of educational programs, work requirements, and "tough love" that denied benefits to some of them.
Clinton signed the "Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act" on August 22, 1996, saying it would "end welfare as we know it and transform our broken welfare system by promoting the fundamental values of work, responsibility, and families." That bill quickly became a symbol of "bipartisan consensus" and a much-touted piece of model legislation for the neoliberal economic agenda.
Unfortunately, we now know that it didn't work. In fact, it backfired. A report from the University of Michigan's National Poverty Center showed that extreme poverty increased in the United States by 130 percent between 1996 and 2013 -- and pinpointed "welfare reform" as the cause.
Despite its documented failure, the myth persists that "welfare reform" succeeded. This belief has so far proved resistant to the mounting evidence against it, perhaps because it serves the personal interests of wealthy individuals and corporations who don't care to be taxed for antipoverty programs.
This "reform" myth also serves to assuage their consciences. Politicians like Cuomo and Clinton are all too happy to help in that effort by assuring wealthy Americans that this policy is smart, even liberal, and that it only coincidentally happens to benefit them personally.
2. The End of Welfare As They Know It
The mayor of New York City cannot supersede a federal law, but a recent executive action will hopefully serve to re-open the debate on welfare "reform." De Blasio ended the policies of his GOP predecessors and eased requirements for welfare eligibility in New York City. New rules will give young people more time to complete their educations, and native speakers of foreign languages time to learn English. He also cut back on some "workfare" requirements (which in some cases amount to little more than ritual humiliation.)
For the first time, allowances will be made for parental duties, travel time, and other obstacles which are faced every day by the poor -- but which are little-understood by prosperous "bipartisans" from either party.
As a de Blasio official explained, "we have the data to show that toughness for the sake of toughness hasn't been effective."
3. Data Driven
Data. That word is anathema to "centrist" politicians and commentators who claim to be technocrats, but who are actually driven by ideology, donor cash, or both. When de Blasio issued his orders the hyperventilation was, predictably, all but instantaneous. "We don't need to guess how de Blasio's welfare philosophy will pan out," wrote Heather McDonald, who is "Thomas W. Smith Fellow at the Manhattan Institute."
Reihan Salam fulminated in Slate that welfare programs must "rest on a solid moral foundation. And that, ultimately, is what work requirements are all about."
But when the work isn't available, or people have no practical way of obtaining it, it's immoral to make them -- or their children -- suffer. By ending the inhumane but "bipartisan" policies of his predecessors, Bill de Blasio has potentially re-opened the debate on the draconian and failed "welfare reform" concept.
Action on Education
1. Charter Schools Are "Special Interests"
De Blasio's much-publicized struggle with charter school CEO Eva Moskowitz began when he overturned Bloomberg's decision to give her "Success Academy" free space in city buildings. That led her to make a series of false claims about her organization's accomplishments -- claims that were effectively debunked by Diane Ravitch and Avi Blaustein. Success Academy students aren't the best in the state, they aren't the most difficult students in the city -- and the program is so cost-inefficient that it spends over $2,000 per year more per student than other schools serving similar populations.
Bloomberg was generous to Moskowitz because her program suited his predilection for Wall Street-friendly, corporate-cozy ideas -- ideas which appeared on the surface to promote innovation or "reform," but which on further study reveal themselves as a wealth transfer from the many to the few, often at the expense of the public good.
That's exactly what the charter-school movement represents. Sure, it sounds like a good idea: Schools will "compete" for students, and those which offer the best "products" will succeed. As writer and education activist Jeff Bryant says: Everybody loves "choice," right?
But the concept is flawed at its core. Schools aren't failing because students and their parents don't have "choices" in schools. They're failing -- to the extent they are, because even that concept is overhyped -- because they don't have choices in jobs or housing. Schools are struggling because we don't pay teachers well enough, because we underfund our school districts, and because social factors (especially poverty) inhibit the learning process.
2. Rockets to Nowhere
For all the hype and all the money, there's still no evidence that charter schools work. Advocates love to claim that "school choice" offers lower-income children a way out of poverty. But Milwaukee, which the conservative American Enterprise Institute calls "one of the most 'choice-rich' environments in America," remains one of America's 10 most impoverished big cities.
And kids aren't any more educated in Milwaukee than they were before they were given all this "choice." Educator Diane Ravitch reviewed the data and found that, 22 years after the program was implemented, there was no evidence of improvement in students' test scores.
The Economic Policy Institute (EPI) reviewed the "Rocketship" program, which has bid to take over Milwaukee's underperforming schools, and found that it isn't working. They observed that "in 2012-2013, all seven of the Rocketship schools failed to make adequate yearly progress according to federal standards."
Call it "failure to launch."
3. Follow the Money
The EPI also noted that "Blended-learning schools such as Rocketship are supported by investment banks, hedge funds, and venture capital firms that, in turn, aim to profit from both the construction and, especially, the digital software assigned to students."
That might help explain why wealthy Wall Street investors paid Moskowitz's $2,000-plus-per-student cost overruns out of their own pockets. The same hedge funders also happen to have donated at least $400,000 to Andrew Cuomo's reelection campaign. Perhaps coincidentally, Cuomo led the charge against de Blasio after he moved to end Moskowitz's taxpayer-funded privileges.
Charter schools are an ideological and investment opportunity, which explains why enormous sums of money have been expended promoting them. (The latest effort, funded by $12 million from the wealthiest families in the nation, is something called "The Education Post."
Not all charter schools are driven by the profit motive, and some may in fact do a good job. But there is no evidence to support their claims, their operating principles, or the broader "free market" ideology behind them -- an ideology that is founded on hostility to government itself.
4. Breeding Fraud
Ravitch also notes that Washington, D.C., whose "Opportunity Scholarship Program" launched at least one educational celebrity career, was equally unable to demonstrate results. Its final-year report notes that "There is no conclusive evidence that the OSP affected student achievement."
There is conclusive evidence, however, that the charter school movement has produced at least one fairly widespread outcome: fraud. A recent report from the Center for Popular Democracy, Integrity in Education, and ACTION United told the story. The report, titled "Fraud and Financial Mismanagement in Pennsylvania's Charter Schools," showed that the state had failed to properly audit or review its publicly-funded charter schools.
It also uncovered a pattern of abuses so disturbing it makes charter schools look like petri dishes for fraud. The director of one charter school diverted $2.6 million in school funds to rebuild his church. Another stole $8 million for "houses, a Florida condominium, and an airplane." Yet another used taxpayer funds to finance "a restaurant, a health food store, and a private school." A couple stole nearly $1 million for their personal use.
There are more revelations in the report -- and it only covers one state.
And yet, despite mounting evidence to the contrary, charter schools continue to be talked up by Bill Clinton, whose recent boosterism was described by Salon's Luke Brinker as "stunning" in its variance with the facts. (Jeff Bryant has more on the reality behind Clinton's disingenuous remarks.)
5. The Ongoing Battle
De Blasio acted wisely in moving to end Bloomberg's gift of scarce New York City school resources to Moskowitz. He was ultimately forced to back down, at least in the short term, after her big-dollar backers won a victory in Albany.
That was no surprise, given the money behind the so-called "reformers." But it's not the end of the story, either. De Blasio's position on charter schools triggered a fierce response -- but it also triggered a long-overdue conversation.
By challenging the conventional wisdom on charter schools, Bill de Blasio has started something their backers didn't want: a genuine debate on their merits. He may have lost a battle, but if the debate continues he's likely to win the war.
Leadership Through Action
By taking actions which challenge the orthodoxy of his own party's corporate wing -- an orthodoxy shared and taken to extremes by the entire GOP -- Bill de Blasio is changing the political landscape. Although he is reportedly close to the Clintons (he managed Hillary's 2000 senatorial campaign), his executive decisions are offering a new political vision for progressives who have felt starved for representation in the two-party system of recent decades.
De Blasio's deeds haven't been limited to education and welfare, of course. As we've discussed elsewhere, he's taken on issues that range from the minimum wage to the environment, and to housing as a human right.
He's made mistakes, and he's all but certain to make more as he navigates difficult political waters. De Blasio's trying to effect change from within the political process, which is always a risky endeavor. But he's made great strides in a short time. His is the sort of leadership which can change the national political landscape even as it improves the quality of life for his constituents.
Bill de Blasio is using his position as mayor of New York to lead -- with action as well as words. And for that he's owed a debt of gratitude.
Source
Group Blasts Fed for Lack of Diversity in Leadership
Source:...
Source: Wall Street Journal
Federal Reserve leadership is overly male, almost entirely white and drawn too frequently from the banking community, according to a group critical of the central bank.
A new report from the Center for Popular Democracy’s Fed Up campaign analyzes the types of people populating the Fed’s Washington-based board of governors, the regional bank presidencies and the regional bank boards of directors.
The report notes that all voting members of the central bank’s rate-setting Federal Open Market Committee and nearly all the regional bank presidents are white. Just two of the 12 presidents and two of the five governors are women.
“These key decision-making bodies remain dramatically unbalanced and unrepresentative of the vast majority of people who participate in the economy,” said the group, which has called for more public input into the selection of regional bank presidents and their performance evaluations.
The center said the composition of the Fed’s leadership bodies violates the spirit of the law that created the central bank, which calls for membership drawn from many different industries and interests.
A Fed spokesman responded to the criticism about the regional bank boards by saying the central bank has “focused considerable attention” to finding directors “with diverse backgrounds and experiences” that represent agriculture, commerce, industry, services, labor and consumers, as the law requires.
“We also are striving to increase ethnic and gender diversity,” the spokesman said, noting a rise in minority representation on the boards from 16% in 2010 to 24% today. Female representation has risen from 23% to 30% over the same period, and all told, 46% of regional directors now are either a woman or a member of a racial minority, the spokesman added.
Fed Chairwoman Janet Yellen is the central bank’s first female leader.
The Fed Up group, with a membership drawing heavily from labor unions and community organizations, is a regular critic of the central bank. It has argued in recent months that the Fed shouldn’t raise short-term interest rates and has pressed its case in private meetings with Fed officials. Several of its members appeared outside the central bank’s research conference in Jackson Hole, Wyo., last year to call attention to their views.
The group’s concern about a dearth of diversity at the Fed has been echoed by former Minneapolis Fed chief Narayana Kocherlakota. He argued in a blog post last month the central bank has appeared to give short shrift to racial concerns in part because there have been almost no African-Americans in its policy-making ranks. He wrote that the concerns of racial minorities have been “underemphasized” at the Fed.
The last African-American to serve on the Fed board was Roger W. Ferguson Jr., who served as a governor between 1997 and 2006 and as vice chairman from 1999 to 2006. The first African-American to serve as a Fed governor was Andrew Brimmer, from 1966 to 1974.
The report showed particular concern about the directors on the regional Fed bank boards, which are drawn from the private sector. It said 83% are white, compared with around two-thirds of the total U.S. population.
“The diversity of regional board members is meant to inform the bank presidents, who in turn, participate in discussions and vote at the FOMC,” the report said. “However, the boards, the presidents, and the FOMC fail to represent their region’s racial diversity.”
The report also said its analysis found that representatives of banking and what it calls commercial interests have increased their share of regional Fed board seats in recent years. Representatives of community groups and labor unions account for fewer than 5% of the available board seats, according to the center.
Among the regional Fed bank boards’ most high-profile roles is selecting their bank presidents. Recent regulatory changes now bar directors from participating in that process if their firms are regulated by the bank.
The directors also provide information to bank officials about local economic conditions and give advice on running the banks.
2 months ago
2 months ago